Smt Kavitha K H Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

Smt Kavitha K H Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Respondent No. 4 - Tahasildar is directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 20.08.2023 and mutate the petitioner's name in the computerized RTC to the extent of 4 acres in Sy.No.24 situated at H.Thimmapura Village, Tarikere Taluk, Chikmagaluru District, taking cognizance of existing manual RTC records and all other relevant documents; the exercise shall be completed within six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order.

Issue for consideration

Whether, despite a grant in the petitioner's favour and mutation of her name in the manual revenue records (continued till 1998 to 2002), the respondents' failure to reflect her name in the ownership column of the computerized RTC amounts to actionable inaction warranting a direction to rectify the RTC.

Court's answer

Where there is a grant in favour of the petitioner and her name was duly mutated to the revenue records based on the grant order, the petitioner has a legal right to seek a direction against the respondents.

Ratio / Principle

The respondents are obligated to rectify the computerized RTC by strictly aligning it with the manual RTC entries maintained by revenue authorities coupled with the grant order in favour of the petitioner.

Key takeaways

In view of the respondents' inaction, this is a fit case where a mandamus lies.ratio¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition No. 28999 of 2024 (KLR-RR/SUR), High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru (Oral Order, Hon'ble Mr Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum, 16 January 2025) - ALLOWED. Petitioner Smt. Kavitha K.H was aggrieved that, pursuant to computerization of RTCs, her name was not reflected in the ownership column, although the land had been granted to her and pursuant to the grant her name was mutated in the revenue records and continued from 1998 to 2002. The Court held that if there is a grant in favour of the petitioner and her name was duly mutated based on the grant order, she has a legal right to seek a direction against the respondents; the respondents are obligated to rectify the computerized RTC by strictly aligning it with the manual RTC entries maintained by revenue authorities coupled with the grant order in her favour; and, given their inaction, the matter is fit for mandamus. Respondent No. 4 - Tahasildar was directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 20.08.2023 (Annexure-D) and mutate her name in the computerized RTC to the extent of 4 acres in Sy.No.24, H.Thimmapura Village, Tarikere Taluk, Chikmagaluru District, taking cognizance of the existing manual RTC records and all other relevant documents, completing the exercise within six weeks from receipt of certified copy. Filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India; no precedents cited.

NC: 2025:KHC:1733 WP No. 28999 of 2024

1 -

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 28999 OF 2024 (KLR-RR/SUR)

BETWEEN:

SMT. KAVITHA .K.H W/O VENKATESH AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS H. THIMMAPURA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, TARIKERE TALUK CHIKMAGALURU DISTRICT, PIN-577 228.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. H. MALATESH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT, BENGALURU-02.

Digitally signed by 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AL BHAGYA CHIKMAGALURU DISTRICT Location: High Court of Karnataka CHIKMAGALURU-577 101.

THE ASST. COMMISSIONER TARIKERE TALUK CHIKMAGALURU DISTRICT, PIN-577 228.

THE TAHASILDAR TARIKERE TALUK CHIKMAGALURU DISTRICT, PIN-577 228. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. B.P. RADHA, AGA)

2 -

NC: 2025:KHC:1733 WP No. 28999 of 2024

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R4 AND THE CONCERNED REVENUE AUTHORITY TO CONSIDER THE PETITIONER'S REPRESENTATION DATED 20.08.2023, PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-D AND ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

ORAL ORDER

Learned AGA accepts notice for the respondents.

The petitioner is aggrieved by the inaction of the respondents in not reflecting the petitioner's name in the ownership column pursuant to computerization of RTC. The petitioner to substantiate her right in the property claims that this land is granted to her and pursuant to grant her name was mutated in the revenue records and continued till 1998 to 2002. Pursuant to computerization, the petitioner's name is not reflected in RTC. If there is a grant in favour of the petitioner and the petitioner's name was duly mutated to the revenue records based on the

grant order, the petitioner has a legal right to seek direction against the respondents. The respondents are

3 -

NC: 2025:KHC:1733 WP No. 28999 of 2024

equally obligated to rectify the computerized RTC by strictly aligning to the manual RTC entries maintained by revenue authorities coupled with the grant order in favour of the petitioner. Since there is inaction on the part of respondents, this is a fit case where a mandamus lies.

For the reasons stated supra, this Court passes the following:

ORDER

i. The writ petition is allowed.

ii. Respondent No.4 - Tahasildar is hereby directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 20.08.2023 and mutate the name of the petitioner in computerized RTC to the extent of 4 acres in Sy.No.24 situated at H.Thimmapura Village, Tarikere Taluk, Chikmagaluru District taking cognizance of existing manual RTC records and all other relevant documents.

4 -

NC: 2025:KHC:1733 WP No. 28999 of 2024

iii. This exercise shall be completed within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

Sd/(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE

NBM

List No.: 2 Sl No.: 2